Hi,
I thought that the passage was a relatively easy one. However, I got Question 4 wrong. I usually have great difficulties answering the questions concerning the purpose of a particular line in the text.
I understand why D is supported in the text. However, i dont really get why C is not supported. Could not we assume that the causal talk was a part of her conventions? line 35 also states that she derived her style through the imitation of earlier works. So all in all I though that if we take both together we could infer that she substituted her conventions for the aesthetic principles of the past (c).
How do I know when my inferences regarding these questions are too big and when they are too small? I always seem to miss the golden middle.
Thanks in advance.
Franzi